Talk:Archetype
Lugh (FE6) Suggested by GreatDane112 for Merric archetype. Opposed by User:Nauibotics. The result should be decided by the majority. For the time being, leave it off the article. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 04:11, May 3, 2017 (UTC) :After putting some thought to this, I think I support GreatDane112's suggestion. Lugh is the first recruitable mage, and his mother is Nino, which would at least explain his skill with magic, despite not being raised or taught by her. Without a mentor stated by him, I suppose this is a good reason for consideration? -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 12:27, May 4, 2017 (UTC) ::It's not that I oppose his reasoning, but here's where things become super gray. How much does Lugh fulfill the archetype? Here's what Lugh fulfills: He is the first mage and he is of similar personality. However, we've denied certain characters in other games who have Merric traits like Ricken for example. Otherarrow stated that because Ricken is the second mage AND has no acknowledge teacher, we weren't supposed to count him. This is even though Ricken is the first MALE mage, has a similar personality, and is a Wind Mage. GreatDane insisted on putting the "friendship to the Lord character" point, which is true for Merric and a lot in his archetype, but Lugh is not friends with Roy, joining him to make Bern pay for destroying his home, not because he's friends with Roy. Ricken on the other hand, idolizes Chrom so at least there is some bond between the two that has been established. It's like how strict we've been on a lot of these archetypes like Navarre/Lon'qu. Lon'qu is in personality the same as Navarre, but because he's not fought as an enemy nor is there a canon relationship with the Lena-like character of the game, Lissa, we don't include him on that Archetype, despite the strong similarities. It's up to you guys. I only have been acting in the manner I have because of how strict Otherarrow has been on adding characters to this page. If he did not allow Ricken to be on the page mainly because he has no identified mentor, I doubt Lugh would fly either and why he wasn't on the page before this whole debate. —Nauibotics (talk) 03:06, May 9, 2017 (UTC) Nasir and Ena (FE9) I feel they should count for the Malledus Archetype, as they act as a tactical confidant for Ike (and Petrine in Ena's case) in Path of Radiance. ''They seem to check the boxes off for what counts as one. GreatDane112 (talk) 12:41, May 3, 2017 (UTC) :But they're not Ike's main tactical confidant like most Malledus are. Soren and Titania fulfil that role much more than Nasir and Ena.—Nauibotics (talk) 18:43, May 3, 2017 (UTC) ::But they still fulfill that role to at least some degree, they may not be Ike's main tacticians, but when they are they bring forth some of the most important ones in the story. I'd also argue Ena to be something of a villanous example (even if it's only temporary) as she does act as Petrine's main tactical accompaniment and a foil to Soren who fulfills the archetype for much the same reasons that Ena does. I don't think there has to be just Soren and Titania when Nasir and Ena are behind a good amount of the important decisions behind both sides. GreatDane112 (talk) 18:50, May 3, 2017 (UTC) Caeda I don't believe Ephraim, Eirika, Lucina and Azura should be included in the Caeda archetype since they actually are ''Lord characters in their respective games. I'm also not sure about Deirde's inclusion; she's important, but not "secondary protagonist" important the Julia is in the Second Generation Are You Serious (talk) 16:02, May 4, 2017 (UTC) : I'd contest Azura, she's essentially Corrin's right-hand and main love interest, checking the boxes for the Archetype. She's also not the protagonist, which is the main criteria of the Lord. GreatDane112 (talk) 17:39, May 4, 2017 (UTC) ::Thinking about it, Ephraim and Eirika are dual Lords. One has a slightly reduced role in the other's route, but they are both important throughout the entire game. I think that much is confirmed. Lucina is interesting and more Caeda like given she has a supporting role in the first half of Awakening and is more involved directly in the second half, but is essentially just slightly less important than Chrom or the Avatar in terms of the story events. Awakening is really the story of the Chrom and Avatar. ::As for Azura, she's not the Avatar's main love interest as much as the game does not have canon pairings. This point makes even less sense if the Avatar is female as there is no same-sex S-Support between Azura and the female Avatar. I would say Azura has Lord qualities, but she's essentially a deuteragonist when compared to the story being mainly about the Avatar. Azura is the most prominent ally and heavily involved in all three routes, more so than any past Caeda has been. If anything the entire Hoshidan and Nohrian siblings are Caedas too in terms of their importance in the Birthright and Conquest stories respectively. Hard to say. This is one of those archetypes that is really hard to define (and was only added recently I might add).—Nauibotics (talk) 00:58, May 5, 2017 (UTC) Corrin (FE 14) is a Malledeus??? Ive noticed someone added in Corrin/Avatar for the "Malledeus" section... which is completely untrue as Corrin is not the strategist to the lord... HE IS THE lord character... and he also is not knowledgeable at all about the land... If anything Azura (for revelations, or perhaps the other stories as well... considering the major part she plays) is the Malledeus of FE 14.. ~~Ronman5~~ :Corrin, aka the Fates Avatar, is the main Lord character, that much is confirmed. Azura is more like Caeda. Important to the plot, not just a strategist for the Avatar. :True I suppose... but taking a shot at the dark here... Corrin is no strategist... thats why he certaintly is not the "Malledeus" of the group... and I said Azura as while she is a Caeda, she is the one to lead them through the invisible kingdom... But I do see points about that... I believe there truely is no "Malledeus" of FE 14. ~~Ronman5~~ Kliff and Est in FE 15 Kliff has been arguably nerfed in Echoes, making him more average. So I'm not sure if he should be considered his archetype anymore. However, it's a bit strange to just have FE 2 next to his name, when he obviously also appears in FE 15. Est also has the same issue as broken down by a user on reddit. So, I'm not sure how you all want to tackle this. Darthkeeper (talk) 08:05, May 16, 2017 (UTC)Darthkeeper : IMO, both should be included. Sophia IS included after all, and she is even worse than FE15 Est (her bad stats are legendary among people who played FE6). Then there's Rina (that 10% Str/Def on a cavalier) and Ewan (He has lower growth total than Lute for god's sake). But still, why did they have to butcher Est more in each successive game? : As for Kliff, IMO he still fits the archetype, being a LVL 1 villager. As far as I know Mozu was not particularly impressive statwise, yet she counts. : Kruggov (talk) 09:31, May 16, 2017 (UTC) Berkut and Fernand Berkut is a complex one. From what I've seen he can either be a Michalis (Due to his determination to rule Rigel and beat Alm) or a Camus (He know that Rigel is on the brink of destruction, yet he still fights for his dying country). However I'm having trouble deciding which archetype he fits into. So I thought I can get get some help deciding where he belongs. As for Fernand. I'm wondering if he is even based off a archetype. Again what are your opinions? MasterTEH (talk) 15:45, May 20, 2017 (UTC) Caeda archetype is too inconsistent It should be something like early game Pegasus Knight or important female character who is charismatic. Like there is a pattern with Caeda, Karin, and Lilina recruiting many units, but I don't see Deidre and Sothe having any connection to them besides being love interests to the protagonist. Emperor Hardin (talk) 02:48, May 23, 2017 (UTC) :Love interest/family relation and heavily involved in the plot. That's all there is for this archetype and they fit, no? -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 11:17, May 23, 2017 (UTC) ::The Caeda archetype seems to be one we determined ourselves (that definitely, with complete certainty, was not on the article when I started reading this wiki back in 2011) so it appears to be the matter of however we define it. This we might have to wait for Otherarrow to return for. --Thenewguy34 15:48, May 23, 2017 (UTC) :::I caught this browsing by chance (I still read the wiki!) and if I was still actively editing and stressing myself out curating this particular page, I'd have axed this one, for what it's worth. Don't take this as "this is what you must do" or anything though, I'm just passing by.--Otherarrow (talk) 16:18, May 23, 2017 (UTC) ::::I actually have never been bothered looking at this page until you're away. Now that I'm involved, all I can see is that this page is way too subjective. Unless we find a better way to present this page, where people could have a clearer view of the key conditions of each archetype (lorewise/statwise), this page will never stop being the page with most revisions/edit wars. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 16:37, May 23, 2017 (UTC) ::::L Any Love interest that is involved with the plot is far too generic for my tastes. There needs to be a specific pattern. I think it needs to be rewritten or axed as Otherarrow suggested. Some characters that should probably be added I really think that Ricken (FE13) definitely qualifies for the Merrick archetype; as do Lon'qu (FE13) as a Navarre, and Mark (FE7) as a Malledus. I could maybe argue that Sumia (FE13) is a Caeda, though that's kind of debatable. Actually, as noted above, this archetype in of itself is really debatable; maybe it could be specifically a Pegasus Knight who is also a love interest, is implied to be the most "canon", and/or is heavily involved in the plot? I've noticed that love interests that tend to be pushed the most tend to be Pegasus Knights (or are false love interests in the case of Elincia). Or maybe perhaps a love interest character who can recruit other characters? Also, I don't know if this counts as an archetype, and I could be wrong since I'm relatively new to this fandom, but I've noticed that if the Lord has a sister that isn't a Lord themselves (or at least one of them if there's many, i.e. Corrin), they are overwhelmingly likely to be healers. Mainly, Elice, Mist, Lissa, Elise and Sakura come to mind. Is this an "Elice archetype" or just a coincidence? Teetdidkya (talk) 10:48, May 25, 2017 (UTC) :Welcome to the most subjective place on the wiki. The characters you proposed have all been rejected to my memory, and why? I have no idea, this should be changed somehow. :Your new archetype proposal doesn't seem to be qualified imo, simply cuz there are not enough candidates, and 2 of your candidates already belonged to the Maria archetype (Mist and Elise). -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 15:02, May 25, 2017 (UTC) Ricken does not belong in the Merric archetype, as he does not have a mentor or teacher that ultimately has foresight over his training - every member of the Merric archetype does, and Ricken does not. Lon'qu is not a recruitable enemy, a necessity to be a member of the Navarre archetype. Mark as a Malledus I do not remember being brought up; if Otherarrow did reject Mark as a Malledus I would have to hear his rationale first. I see your point but I have a very strong feeling Otherarrow may have removed him from that list in the past. I removed the Caeda archetype and so far Khang has not objected to its removal so that idea is rather dead. --Thenewguy34 15:35, May 25, 2017 (UTC) :I wasn't the one suggested or added the Caeda archetype though, but since it got issues, so yeah, gone it should. -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 16:11, May 25, 2017 (UTC) A page for rejected archetypes? So I've been thinking if this would help, like creating another page (such as Archetype/Rejected) to include rejected characters of certain archetypes or even an archetype in a whole. This would likely reduce some issues with the page, like people will know why their choices were rejected and other people won't add the similar ones later. Any thoughts? -- [[User:KhangND|'Khang']] (talk) 16:21, May 25, 2017 (UTC)